Skip to main content

About this Show

[untitled]

NETWORK

DURATION
00:30:00

RATING

SCANNED IN
San Francisco, CA, USA

SOURCE
Comcast Cable

TUNER
Channel 89 (615 MHz)

VIDEO CODEC
mpeg2video

AUDIO CODEC
ac3

PIXEL WIDTH
528

PIXEL HEIGHT
480

TOPIC FREQUENCY

San Francisco 10, Farrell 4, California 4, Mrs. Barrington 3, Uc 3, Ted Egan 3, Berkeley 3, Us 3, The City 2, Tom Waddell 2, Pacific Gas & Electric 2, Uc Berkeley 2, Ms. Reyes 2, Mr. Egan 2, Stephanie 2, Dollar 1, Campbell 1, United States 1, Ann Kelly 1, Dph 1,
Borrow a DVD
of this show
  SFGTV    [untitled]  

    November 4, 2012
    8:30 - 9:00pm PST  

8:30pm
as well. >> i'm corin buchanan department of public health. tom waddell will stay open as an emergency site, but the main operation will move to this site. >> thank you. let's move to the budget report pled guilty rose. >> mr. chair and members of committee, on page 8 of our report, we have a table 1 and that table shows that the kelly cullen community will receive subsidies for 172 units at an average estimated subsidy of $601 per units, per month, that is for the 172 units and over the 15-year term of the agreement as you can see in table 5, the total estimated
8:31pm
costs are $18,475,118 and they are general fund costs as miss campbell has stated. we recommend that you approve this resolution as consistent with previous board policy on other similar agreements. we also recommend that you request that the department of puck health report to the budget and finance county full board of supervisors on the findings from the new york university study on housing and health outcomes. and i really just want to reiterate or add a couple of
8:32pm
points. this demonstrates something that we all know about homelessness and this is the important link with health. so we're really proud to have put together this project with clinic on the ground floor. second, the social innovation fund grant that miss ely referred to was a hypercompetitive national competition of which there were only four recipients and so we're really pleased not only that the project was deemed worthy to win the competition, but also that it will bring resources that will directly reduce the amount of money that the department of public health has to pay for the project for services. it's a two-year grant with a potential for a three-year extension. and then finally, i just want to highlight that this project
8:33pm
is a partnership in the most genuine meaning of the term. at tmdc is maybe on the title and we are the owner, but it's generally a community asset of which we are merely the stewards. the department of public health, the mayor's office of housing, the state and federal government and many other parties came together to bring the project to fruition and it would not have happened with anyone. thank you. >> thank you very much. if there have are no other members of public, we will close public comment. supervisor kim. >> i want to say had you appreciative of the project and it's exciting and it's a beautiful, beautiful building and it will be great to see this finally opened by the end of the year, is that right? to be permanently supportive housing and a public clinic space for dph.
8:34pm
i know to speaking to the staff at tom waddell, they have been looking for a space that is more conducive and welcoming to our most vulnerable residents and patients and think it's greater that they have a welcoming site right in the heart of tenderloin at the y. i had an opportunity to go on a tour with don flak so i'm happy to move this forward with a motion to approve and also as a committee report. >> we could take that without objection. also before we actually i gavel down, i would like to get a tour of the site to work that in the next month or so. it would be great and i know it's a great milestone for our city that this project is coming to fruition. so we'll approve that. send it forward as a committee report with recommendation. [ gavel ]
8:35pm
thank you item no. 3, please. >> item no. 3, resolution retroactively authorizing the department of environment to spend a grant in the amount of $2,977,000 from the california public utilities commission through pacific gas & electric company to continue with an energy use and demand reduction through energy-efficiency program in the city and county of san francisco for the period of october 15th, 2012 through december 31, 2012. >> mr. rodriguez, welcome. >> thank you, guillermo rodriguez, department of the environment. the department is requesting the committee's approval to accept and expend a grant in the amount of $2,977,000 from the california public utilities commission through pacific gas & electric company to continue
8:36pm
an energy use and demand reduction through energy-efficiency program through the period of october 15 of this year through december 31 of this year. it working cooperatively with pg&e and additional funding is being allocated to the city to accelerate approximately 450 businesses and multi-family projects totaling about 3 million megawatts in savings. the savings of the 450 projects is significant just to give you an example of what 3 megawatts of savings equivalent to running 3,000 san francisco homes for a year. so these 450 projects are important. a few examples of the project certainly include familiar places at&t park and the fresh
8:37pm
fish market at geneva is one of our projects. pacific supermarket on 2900 almaine is a project. the catholic charities building on 1948 ocean is a project. we have some large projects like the palace hotel. we just heard tenderloin housing clinic is one of our other projects and conrad house is a project. the examples of the type of work are really very individual to each site, but a lot of it is for commercial office laguardias, commercial overhead lighting and a lot of it is changing their lighting for a new led project. in addition, there is lots of several kind of therm projects or natural gas projects that
8:38pm
are included. in this next round. the last time i came before this committee there was an interest in understanding better our geographic representation of where historically the department has provided incentives and i provided the committee members -- and if i could have the overhead. this represents the example of the various programs that the department has had throughout the existence of these programs. the bulk of our programs are for commercial, and large multi-family housing units. and gives you just a sense of the projects and where they have been throughout san francisco. not only have businesses and residents saved money from these programs and we have had the positive benefits on the environment in terms of greenhouse gas reductions. but in some of the contractors performing the work, also employee local folks here in
8:39pm
san francisco, are able to continue that program. we estimate about a little over $20 million that residents and businesses have saved. instead of writing a check out on a monthly basis they have been able to keep that here in san francisco. and it's been a very positive aspect. the department wishes to recognize pg&e for their help in expediting this process, so that we can complete a lot of this work, this calendar year. i urge the committee's acceptance of the grant and my colleague ann kelly and myself are here to answer any questions. thank you. >> great. thank you for your presentation. this item does not have a budget analyst's report. so we can go on to public comment. and seeing no member of the public come forward for public comment. we will close public comment. thank you.
8:40pm
and colleagues, can we have a motion to move this forward as a committee report to the november 6th board of supervisors' meeting with recommendation? we'll take that without objection [ gavel ] ment i. no. 4, please. >> i. no. 4, ordinance amending the san francisco business and tax regulation code article 12a by amending section 906.5 to priest the payroll expense tax exclusion for small business net new payroll for years 2012 through 2015 from terminating in event that the voters of the city and county of san francisco pass a gross receipts tax. >> thank you victor. we have legislationoff aide to supervisor farrell, catheryn stephanie, welcome. >> good morning, supervisors, cathery stephanie, lengthiest aide to supervisor farrell. what have you before you is clean-up legislationings that follows our payroll tax exclusion legislation that was
8:41pm
drafted before the gross receipts ballot language was finalized and submitted. so it was originally drafted and legislation will actually terminate upon passage of the gross receipts tax prior to the end of 2012. of course that is assuming that proposition e does pass on november 6th. this legislation before you amends it, so it no it longer terminates november 6th and allows the exemption to remain in effect for tax years 2012-2015. if the gross receipts tax does pass, the city's payroll expense tax would phase out from tax years 2014 through 2018 and ted is here to explain how the facout is going to work with the exclusion. as you recall the purpose of the payroll tax exclusion for small businesss is to create and increase the number of jobs within the city and county of san francisco. by providing an incentive for small businesses to create new jobs. the legislation before you today will allow that to happen by keeping the exemption in
8:42pm
place through 2015 as originally intended. there are two recommendations in the budget legislative analyst's report that supervisor farrell is fine with. we also have an additional amendment that ted egan is here to explain, lines 14-16 and i have copies of that. again, mr. egan will explain that why it's necessary to calculate the base year payroll tax with the phase-in and exempting. so if i could give this to victor. with that i would either ask that you go to the budget legislative analyst or to ted egan. >> why don't we go to mr. egan first and then to the budget analyst. mr. egan. >> good morning, supervisors, ted egan, controller's office.
8:43pm
the effect of this legislation will really be to bring the exclusion brand new in line with the way other payroll tax exclusions would be treated in the event that the gross receipts tax passes. effectively what that means is that the incentive will remain in place, which is to say businesses will be able to exclude growth in their payroll expense up to $250,000. through 2015. however, because the payroll tax rate will decline, as the payroll tax is phased out, the value of this incentive to businesses will decline at the same time. the amendment that miss stephanie refers to is one that changes the language on lines 14-16 of page 2. that language really pre-dates the idea of the phase-out of
8:44pm
the payroll tax and the gross receipts proposal and if it was not changed it would basically prevent many if not most small businesss from ever taking advantage of this exclusion. what it would really do is say that that in order for a business to take advantage of the exclusion, their actual payroll tax liability would have to increase from one year to the next even though the rate was going down. so in 2014, that would mean that a business would have to grow its payroll by 10% before it could start to take dollar 1 of exclusion by 2015, that number is unknown. but it could be 25% before that number is -- before that threshold is reached and the business could take advantage of the exclusion. it's my understanding and this is not a recommendation from our office, but it's not my understanding that is not the supervisors' intent with the legislation. i was merely asked to draft alternative language, which you
8:45pm
have before you. >> okay. thank you very much. we'll go to the budget am, analyst, mr. rose. . >> [pwha-eus/]ed on the current payroll tax rate of 139 5% as you know the controller's office had previously estimated reduced payroll expense tax revenues at $2 million annually from the net new payroll tax exclusion. so that would be a total reduction in city revenues of about $8 million over the four-year period of the exclusion. under the proposed ordinance, the estimated reduction in city revenues would be $7.3 million over the four-year term of the exclusion. if the voters do approve the gross receipts tax proposed under proposition e. we also point out on page 7 of the report that the office of
8:46pm
the treasurer and tax collector is working with the mayor and the controller's office to identity funds to pay for an estimated additional one-time programming and related costs, which are needed. they are estimated at $55,000. we consider approval a policy matter of the two recommendations that we have is to amend the proposed ordinance and this is for clarification purposes as to the intent. if a person is exempt from filing a payroll tax, the regulations code 6.9-2 in the base year, the person's base year payroll tax shall be $150,000 and the purpose of calculating this exclusion. and with my recommend that you amend the proposed ordinance to require the issuance of a report to the [pwra-urpbgs/] committee of budget and finance committee of the board
8:47pm
of supervisors and assessing the effect of the exclusion on job creation and payroll growth along small businesses that apply for the net new payroll tax exclusion. we consider it as amended as a policy matter for the board of supervisors. >> i'm just wondering what supervisor farrell as position on the first recommendation, you are in accordance with that? >> is he fine with both of those. >> thank you. this item we can open up for public comment. and seeing no one here, but us chickens we'll close public comment. just some words on this. i actually did not support this ordinance as a stand-alone ordinance, looking at the exemption first of all for small businesses earlier this year. i know that that actual ordinance was anticipating a gross receipts tax that could go to the ballot. we hospital yet drafted that gross receipts tax. i did not approve -- i did
8:48pm
not vote in favor of. it i think i was the one person for voting against it. my reasoning for doing that i didn't want to do one exception to our current business tax. i didn't want to do that, but i'm actually going to be supporting this measure today, because i see in context of an actual gross receipts tax measure that is going to the ballot. that will be overall changes to the gross receipts tax if this measure actually now relates to that directly. and i can anticipate what the actual structure of the gross receipts tax is going to be in relation to this measure. so i will be supportive of this going forward. knowing that it's in relation to the whole business tax in general. since we are actually going to be ignoring, i guess prop e will pass or not we'll know next week and it makes sense to
8:49pm
move this forward to the full board. so i can accept the moving this -- i was contemplating whether i was going to move it forward ways committee report or not. but i think that given certification of the election could happen sooner than later, i think it's important that we move it forward to the next board meeting. so i will be okay with that, to doing that. we have recommendation from budget analyst can we get a motion to accept those. >> motion to accept amendments. and then motion to move forward as a committee report for the november 6th meeting of this item. >> so moved. >> we can take that without objection. [ gavel ] . >> did we also make the amendment that i put forward with ted egan, the language? did we also make that amendment or did you make that amendment, i should say? or you did just make the amendments from the budget analyst? >> we made the amendments from the budget analyst.
8:50pm
the first one seems to be already in the ordinance or is not? >> that adds additional language. ted? >> i believe that the piece of piece of paper replaces lines 14-16 on page 2 of the ordinance. >> okay, i'm just reviewing that right now. thank you.
8:51pm
so let's rescind the vote. colleagues. >> motion to rescind. >> we'll rescind the vote. >> motion to amend the ordinance as articulated by miss stephanie. >> okay. and we'll take that without objection. and on the underlying ordinance, moving forward as a committee report, to the november 6th meeting with recommendation, we can take that without objection: >> so moved. >> thank you. >> that completes the agenda. >> we are adjourned.
8:52pm
okay. i know it's a lot going on, but turn your attention to ms. reyes. >> boys and girls, we are going to read grades. we have been talking about the government and upcoming election. so we will read our book. i love the way i see table one. everybody's eyes are on me. what a great job. "grace for president."
8:53pm
one monday mrs. barrington rolled out a big post wer all the presidents on it. grace could not believe her eyes. where are the girls! that's a very good question, says mrs. barrington. the truth is, our country has never had a woman president. no girl president? ever! >> no, i'm afraid not, said mrs. barrington. >> grace sat down at her desk. no girls. whatever heard of such a crazy thing. finally she raised her hand. >> scholars from uc berkeley, we talked about how very special we were. we tell you all the time
8:54pm
you are special. the mayor, of all the other schools in san francisco, chose to come. and uc berkeley. so the mayor will talk to you a little while. all of our attention is which way? >> well, good morning everyone. >> good morning. >> i want to first begin by thanking your teacher, ms. mayes, for letting me come and be part of your class room today. of course your principal for letting us come to be part of your earthquake preparedness day. how many people know what today is? go ahead? what is that? okay. well, yes. [ indiscernible ] >> that is right. we call it the great
8:55pm
earthquake drill. yes. we are getting ready. did you know -- let me give you numbers. 56,000 students in our school district are all participating at the same time. in the cities, 322,000 people are part of this drill, yes. then in the state of california 9.3, from los angeles, san diego, san francisco, all participating in this earthquake drill. that is pretty big large numbers of people that are joining all of you. don't you feel special? yeah, everybody is doing this. i have to my left and right are really important department heads. our chief of police is to my left. he is participating and has a lot of staff to support this effort.
8:56pm
we have our fire chief. did you know? you reading from the book, grace for president, she is our female chief of our fire department. to her right is rob, the head department of our department of emergency management. one of the most important departments that's working with police and fire and connected up with the whole state with our school system, school board, principals and students to organize and make sure we are prepared for the next earthquake or emergency. this is why we have the great california shakeup drill. this is why we are doing it all over the state. we have to be a little better prepared. how many of you think that you're prepared for the next earthquake at home? yeah? do you think you have some
8:57pm
emergency supplies ready? everybody has a flashlight? what do you have to have to make sure the flashlight works. >> batteries. >> that's right! hopefully when you go home ask your parents, your mom and dad in the house do they have extra supplis in case there's an earthquake. how many of you will be willing to do that today when you go home? we greatly appreciate it. that will make you feel safe and your household. you have to have preparations and be ready for things. that is why we do these drills. practice, practice and practice, keep talking to each other. sometimes i may not be here. in a few years might be a
8:58pm
new mayor, new chief of fire and police. people, should they forget? >> no. no, they should not forget about being prepared . this is why we do these every year. we have a lot of events in between to make sure everybody is working. because we want you all to be safe. we want you to grow up. we want you to be really successful, have the best jobs in the world. but we have to take care of things that might hurt us and be prepared. in an earthquake or emergency, it could hurt us or a member of your family, your household if we are not prepared and getting ready to recover right off the bat. is that a good message for everybody to bring back home? will you do that for me? thank you very much. it is greatly appreciated. i want to thank ms. reyes for this opportunity to be with you. our school district and our -- and members of our school board are here too to oversee and make sure we use everything in every class room.
8:59pm
by the way, one of the reasons i came to the uc berkeley -- yes. >> like uc berkeley? >> i like it. i graduated from uc berkeley too. [applause] >> law school. that is where i went. are we ready? >> that was the -- go back into our routine. it may happen when we are doing our regular thing. we will continue as we are and when we hear that, we do what we always do, okay. thank you very much. >> thank you, thank you. we actually maybe will stick around. we are interested to see whether grace does become president. how many know we are voting for president of the united states? >> go obama. >> yeah, i will take a